We SMers use the words safe, sane, consensual to promote the ethics and responsibility of SM play. But SM isn’t safe or quite sane. Life isn’t safe and can’t be made totally safe no matter how hard we try, it’s always a risk. SM is even riskier. It’s rewards may be worth the additional risks. So it is sane to attempt to make SM reasonably safe. However, making it too safe would effectively gut its power. Nor is SM entirely sane because it must go beyond the rational - both down into the animal body and into the unknown regions of the mind and soul. It’s dichotomy of control and giving up open us to the unknown, hidden sides of ourselves. There is always the potential for losing our inhibitions in positive and negative ways.
SMers usually agree that SM is not an activity where real anger is to be released, especially by a top against a helpless bottom. Experienced tops are prepared to face the anger and fear that may manifest in a bottom during intense SM play. Novices who do not know their internal reactions are prone to this. But a savvy bottom can manipulate a top by hostile or rebellious behavior to force the top to respond in a more intense manner. In that situation, if the top loses self-control the bottom may get more than he bargained for.
Consent is another thorny issue. The edges of consent are pliable and fuzzy. During the negotiations before a scene begins a blanket consent with limits is usually given by a bottom. Most tops will respect these limits, but it should be understood by both top and bottom that limits exist to be pushed and extended. Is this implicit in consent? In the midst of heavy play hidden desires may manifest as inhibitions are broken. More consent may be given without careful consideration of consequences or the limits of consent may be overruled in the heat of passion. Bottoms can lose the sense of self-protection. Or a top may manipulate a bottom’s psyche to get him to accept more than is safe or sane.
How does a top know when to push a limit and how far? He may make a judgment call that it is better to push the bottom over the edge in hopes of a breakthrough experience and be willing to accept the consequences if it fails. Or if in consideration of safety and sanity a top declines to push the bottom as far as he wishes the top may later face the bottom’s disappointment and anger. How can the top know if the bottom does not communicate this fact or if he doesn’t elicit the bottom’s response? The act of asking may break the psychic stability of the scene.
A bottom’s unfulfillment may bring him back to the top for another scene. Many tops don’t want to totally satisfy a bottom so that he will return. The top should be responsible for communication after the scene to be clear where both their heads are - a debriefing. But an interrogation immediately following a scene is probably a bad move. It may take time for the bottom to process and assimilate his experience.
SM appears rough, hyper-masculine, hard, unforgiving and sometimes it is, often it is a fetish facade. The fantasy images and stories in SM magazines and books are often not safe, sane or consensual and belie the reality of SMers lives, hiding the gentle and caring beneath the hard exterior. A major part of the SM experience is learning how to balance these conflicting attributes in our lives and play. Those who can’t or won’t learn this balance have a difficult time being safe, sane and supporting consensuality. When fantasy overrules good judgment it is irresponsible and potentially dangerous behavior.